Meir Panim’s Tiberias Free Restaurant not only provides warm meals, but the opportunity to socialize as well.
Prime Minister Sharon has come in for much criticism both here and in Israel by those who fault him for withdrawing the IDF from Palestinian controlled areas it entered in response to shootings emanating from there. They argue that remaining in those areas for an extended period of time is in Israel's best interests, but Mr. Sharon is nevertheless bowing to pressure from the Bush administration.
Whether the correct policy for rooting out the violence is to reoccupy Palestinian areas at this time for sustained periods, is not clear-cut. In terms of the immediate problem of the safety of Israeli citizens, an on-site IDF presence would always seem to be the more effective strategy. However, there are other longer term issues involving international support which may point to the wisdom of the current “in and out” approach as part of a policy of incremental escalation.
But there is another dimension to this with respect to which we believe that Prime Minster Sharon is right on target. While it is true that Israel has withdrawn from some Palestinian areas, it did not withdraw from all the areas it reoccupied. Rather, it set as an exit condition regarding each reoccupation that the shooting stop and its security demands met. But Israel pointedly did not set a timetable for withdrawals and ignored calls for an immediate withdrawal from all areas.
Thus, some Israeli analysts are saying that Israel has sent a message to Arafat's Palestinian Authority that it is prepared from now on to enter Palestinian areas whenever and wherever it deems necessary, regardless of what the rest of the world says.
And the Palestinians are worried plenty. According to a Reuters dispatch, the Palestinians are alarmed that Israeli forces have been able to maintain their positions for a week in defiance of world opinion. Palestinian political analyst Ghassan al-Khatib told Reuters that Israel's ability to enter Palestinian-ruled areas at will had set a precedent which threatened arrangements which took effect after the interim peace accords were signed in 1993.
After the Oslo accords, he said, the Palestinians took full control of territory known as Area A. They gained only civilian control in territory referred to as Area B, where the Israelis remained in charge of security. Areas under full Israeli control were designated Area C. “We're in a new situation. Israel is showing deliberately that it is getting in and getting out of Area A when it wants,” Khatib said. “Israel's action is changing Area A into Area B.” Khatib said this undermined the Palestinian Authority because it “can't act as a central authority in these areas…. In the beginning, the army made insignificant incursions and got out almost immediately. They then started to enter for longer periods. They have done this gradually, so that the world now swallows it.”
It's really as simple as A-B-C.
About the Author:
If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.
Comments are closed.
No tweets found.
It would still be too hazardous for an Arab government to accept Israel’s nationhood.
Ignoring the wages of “forgiveness” in South Africa and Gush Katif, Rabbi John L. Rosove usurps the Genesis story of Joseph and his brothers.
Singling out Israel is not only malevolent, it is absurd.
The arrest of a businessman is part of a campaign by the PA to intimidate and extort money.
To date, all the Bedouins’ legal land ownership claims that reached the courts have failed.
“It was quite an institutionalized racism, and we didn’t come to get involved in politics.”
Israel’s R&D expenditure is higher than any western country.
With the passage of time, fewer and fewer people are left to testify about life and death in the camps at the hands of the Nazis.
A fascinating Biblical echo
So much of the struggle between Israel and the Arabs continues to concern space.
Why should a young Israeli become an observant Jew when Judaism’s official representatives preserve it in its exile version?
Like Chamberlain, Obama sued the ayatollahs for peace, insisting the only alternative to appeasement is war.
I have frequently drawn up lists of what I love most about Israel, and Arik Einstein has ranked high.
This new mood among Christian Arabs has worried the communists and Arab nationalist.
After nearly five years in office it should be clear that President Obama has always been a man on a mission to change America and the world. To be sure, we couldn’t disagree more with his vision – and in this we think we speak for most Americans.
We find it noteworthy, if not surprising, that with all the well-documented systematic human rights abuses committed by governments around the world – including, but not limited to, China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan and Zimbabwe – not one resolution condemning any of them is planned by the UN General Assembly.
There is no shortage of pundits who, in pointing out the negatives inherent in the deal the Obama administration struck with Iran over its pursuit of nuclear power, suggest the president and his secretary of state were hoodwinked by the Iranians.
Last week, at the urging of President Obama, the Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 52-48, muscled through a change in Senate rules that will severely restrict the use of filibusters by the Republican minority.
It is no secret that The New York Times editorial page is ordinarily in the tank for President Obama or that, conversely, it rarely misses an opportunity to cast Israel in a negative light.
The controversy over President Obama’s several public assurances that Obamacare would permit people to keep their insurance plans is a disturbing reminder of some very troubling things about this president that have come to light during the course of his presidency.
Soon after taking office in 2009, President Obama spoke of reining in the U.S. role around the world and of making a concerted outreach to non-Western countries, particularly the Arab states and Iran, which he said had been unfairly dealt with in the past by the U.S.
Ray Kelly will soon be stepping down as New York’s police commissioner. While he gets near universal kudos for presiding over law enforcement in a city with crime at record lows, he also has his share of critics who fault him for the way he managed the NYPD’s crime fighting effort, particularly its stop and frisk program.
Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/editorial/as-simple-as-a-b-c/2001/11/30/
Scan this QR code to visit this page online: